Evaluating the principles of radiation protection in diagnostic radiologic examinations: collimation, exposure factors and use of protective equipment for the patients and their companions

Barriers to radiographers' use of radiation safety principles: A qualitative perspective

INTRODUCTION

To minimise the risks associated with ionising radiation, it is necessary for all staff involved to employ specific techniques to reduce radiation exposure of the patient. These techniques include using compression during examinations of the pelvic region and lumbar spine, using a gonad shield, and asking women if they are pregnant. However, some staff do not use these techniques consistently. Increasing compliance requires determining why staff are non-compliant. Thus, this study aims to qualitatively investigate why radiographers do not use these techniques.

METHODS

This qualitative study is based on a cross-sectional electronic survey with open-ended questions. The data were analysed using an inductive qualitative content analysis with quantification of the findings. In total, 111 radiographers from 20 hospitals in Sweden participated.

RESULTS

Three categories appear related to barriers that could obstruct the radiographer from using compression, gonad shields and asking about pregnancy: patient characteristics, interaction between the patient and the radiographer and issues related to the situation and examination.

CONCLUSIONS

The barriers to not using radiation protection measures varied depending on the specific measure. However, the barriers were mainly related to the patient experiencing pain, communication difficulties and cultural reasons. In addition, the lack of adequate and user-friendly equipment was seen as a barrier to applying compression and using gonad shielding.

Perception of patient habitus and the influence on exposure factor selection and resultant imparted dose

INTRODUCTION

Exposure factor selection influences ionising radiation dose and image quality in projection radiography. Radiographers have a duty to comply with legislation, ensuring doses (resulting from exposure factor selection) are kept ALARP. Hence, this paper aims to explore variation in patient habitus perceptions among final-year student radiographers and any influence on imparted dose due to exposure factor selection.

METHODS

Institutional ethics was granted. Student radiographers engaged in a 2-stage primary research study. Students were asked to select exposure factors (kVp and mAs values) and the most appropriate BMI category for several models undergoing a routine anteroposterior abdomen projection. Monte-Carlo simulation software was utilised to establish the absorbed and effective dose for these exposures. SPSS software was used to conduct statistical analysis of this data.

RESULTS

A response rate of 19% (n = 14) was recorded. The findings identified variation in habitus perception with greater variation among female models. (p = 0.002). There was significant variation in exposure factor selection and ionising radiation dose, particularly between the male and female models. There was a significant difference between the healthy, overweight, and obese female models for absorbed (p = 0.032) and effective dose (p = 0.032) but not for the male models.

CONCLUSION

There was a distinct difficulty recognising overweight and obese models and inconsistency regarding the selection of exposure factors. It was concluded that male models were more likely to receive a greater dose than females due to higher proposed exposure factors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study adds to the existing evidence base, providing insight into the perceptions of radiography students and the effect on exposure factor selection. This study will likely stand as a baseline for further investigation into competency levels among qualified radiographers to improve radiation protection.

Pelvic radiation dose measurement for trauma patients in multifield radiographic examinations: A phantom-based TLD dosimetry study

Background and Aims

Trauma patients often suffer from multiple injuries and require undergoing various radiography which is referred to as multifield radiographic examinations. Protective measures may be ignored for these examinations due to stressful emergency situations or patients' conditions. This study was conducted to evaluate the scattered doses received by the pelvis during different common multifield radiographic examinations with an emphasis on field size adjustment.

Methods

A whole-body phantom, PBU-50, resembling the body mass, was used to carry out the common examinations for trauma patients (extremities, skull, chest, abdomen, pelvis, femur, and lumbar radiography), using a Pars Pad X-ray machine. To measure the primary entrance skin doses, three calibrated GR 200 thermoluminescence dosimeter (TLD) chips were placed in the central X-ray beam of scanned organs. Three TLDs were also placed on the pelvis symphysis pubis to measure the scattered dose received by the pelvis due to each carried-out radiography for standard and clinically used field sizes. A Harshaw 3500 TLD Reader was used to read the chips. TLD readouts (nano-Coulomb) were converted to dose (milli Gray [mGy]) using the predefined calibration curve.

Results

The scattered doses to the pelvis due to scanning a single organ differed from 0.80 to 1.70, and 0.82 to 4.09 mGy for standard and clinically used field sizes, respectively. The scattered doses to the pelvis in multifield examinations varied from 0.80 to 8.43 and 0.82 to 13.6 mGy for standard and clinically used field sizes, respectively, depending on the number of scanned organs and their distances from the pelvis.

Conclusions

Multiple and repeated radiographs combined with insufficient protective measures can increase the patient's dose. The findings indicate that the scattered doses received by the pelvis can exceed the reference values in multifield radiography, especially if the radiation field is not restricted properly to the scanned organ.

Radiation Protection among South African Diagnostic Radiographers-A Mixed Method Study

ABSTRACT

Worldwide, radiographers' radiation protection practices vary. In South Africa, evidence of diagnostic radiographers' suboptimal radiation protection practices has been reported, but the reasons for these practices and suggestions to improve practices were lacking. Therefore, this study explored radiation protection among South African diagnostic radiographers. This study used an explanatory, sequential, mixed-method approach. Data were collected in three phases. Phase I, the quantitative phase, used an online questionnaire and respondents from Phase I interested in participating in Phase II, the qualitative phase, were interviewed, yielding 13 in-depth semi-structured telephone interviews. In Phase III, eight radiography managers co-constructed change strategies to optimize radiation protection in South Africa in two focus group interviews. Radiation protection was suboptimal despite diagnostic radiographers having a good attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control toward radiation protection and optimal radiation protection knowledge. Varying attitudes to radiation protection, lack of resources, and support from radiography management and healthcare teams contributed to suboptimal radiation protection practices. Radiography managers suggested increasing radiation protection awareness, ameliorating the diminished stature of the radiographer in the healthcare team, and increasing the availability of optimal quality resources. South African diagnostic radiographers' radiation protection knowledge was optimal, but the implementation of radiation protection varied and was influenced by multiple factors. A radiation protection culture supported by management is advocated to optimize radiation protection. However, ultimately radiation protection practices are incumbent on the individual radiographers' choice to practice radiation protection.

South African radiographers' radiation protection practices, a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Radiation protection is multifarious, and consequently, a radiographers' application of radiation protection is multifaceted. Studies have shown varying radiation protection practices among radiographers. The first quantitative phase of this explanatory, sequential mixed-method study used the theory of planned behaviour to explore South African radiographers' radiation protection behaviour. Overall, South African radiographers' attitudes to radiation protection, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, and radiation protection intention was high. This second phase of the study aimed to explore the reasons for South African radiographers' radiation protection practices.

METHODS

This study used an exploratory and descriptive qualitative approach. Data was collected through 13 in-depth semi-structured telephone interviews. Thematic analysis was used in order to uncover original phenomena. Data saturation was achieved and the study adhered to trustworthiness and ethical measures.

RESULTS

Thematic analysis identified two themes. The participants had the appropriate radiation protection knowledge, but radiation protection compliance remained a personal choice. Impediments such as feeling rushed during imaging of trauma and challenging patients, patients knowledge of radiation protection, resources, imaging referrals, inadequate training when transitioning from analogue to digital radiography and managerial support contributed to radiation protection compliance. Strategies such as further education, research and a change in mindset were suggested to further foster radiation protection compliance.

CONCLUSION

Even though participants' knowledge of radiation protection aligned with the legislated guidelines, limited internalising of the knowledge resulted in compliance being a personal choice. Participants reflected on their insouciant attitude and observed a similar attitude in their radiographer colleagues. Patient and work-related impediments were identified to contribute to radiation protection compliance. Strategies to further foster compliance were suggested.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Understanding the reasons for radiographers' choice in radiation protection will allow the development of strategies that foster optimum application of radiation protection practises. Developing a radiation protection culture that enhances personal compliance supported by education and evidence should be considered.